-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
seeking christianity
- Thread starter syo
- Start date
Exodus 22:18-20 is about an 'execution' for the sake of justice for the righteous or upright people.
Capital punishment was for those who would bring harm to others.
Religious syncretism does water down Christianity.
As foretold at Acts of the Apostles 20:29-30 false clergy would be responsible for the start of the decline.
That does Not mean genuine ' wheat ' Christians would Not remain.
It is the fake ' weed/tares ' Christians that will come to a final end - Matthew 7:21-23
I find the world (Not the Bible) created the mess as described in Matthew chapter 24 and Luke chapter 21.
It is the world who set the doom-and-gloom Doom's Day Clock with its hands set close to striking the dark midnight hour.
This is because the world ignores the Golden Rule and Jesus' New commandment found at John 13:34-35.
If everyone on earth lived by the Golden Rule and by Jesus' New commandment to have the same self-sacrificing love for others as Jesus has, then the world would Not be in the mess that it is in today.
Seems to me the amalgamation in belief systems is the continually evolving philosophies of mankind with its rise and fall in popularity by the changing and shifting whims of 'man' and Not the standards of Scripture.
Religious immigration has changed the religious landscape, including different forms of Catholic emerging with the Latino immigration as a game changer. So, we have the institutionalized church verses the popular church.
Even when cherished myths are exposed, because they are so deeply embedded, that mirage is being kept alive.
Such imaginative construction is simply Not compatible with 1st-century Christian teachings as found in Scripture.
Thus, any modification or adjustment to Scripture for the sake of a ' better ' religion is: heresy
Diamond
Member
the world can't do anything but exists,people are the only things that create the mess this world is into, and most of the world claim to be Christians who believe in the bible. and you were saying................
...and I am saying we are forewarned that "MANY" would come in Jesus' name but prove false - Matthew 7:21-23
The 'mess' falls into the hands of 'Christendom' ( so-called Christian ) full of fake 'weed/tares' Christians.
Audie
Veteran Member
Actually, "analytical" and "cynical" are not even in the same
part of towm. It does not translate well, but we have a saying
to the effect that cynicism is just the seamy side of
innocence or naivete. I have never been plagued with
cyncism beyond a reflexive distrust of men.
"Analytical" does involve dealing withh evidence, but in
a completely opposite way to the facile / emotive
autoresponse of the cynic. The cynic does certainty,
the analyst does doubt.
So, no, you probably do not understand
where I am coming from. "Before (you)
became a Christian." is probably the
context of a Christian society, likely
family background too. I grew up where
that religion is exotic and withal rather
weird.
Philosophy can and does lead many down
strange paths, and logic can readily prove things
that do not happen to be true.
The existence of any absolute cannot be
demonstrated to anthing faintly
resembling proof beyond where it may
exist, if it does anywhere, in math.
So no, I dont think you understand, or at least,
your approach to life and understanding life
are radically different, incompatible with mine.
If I may, what is your work that involves evidence?
Finally on Pascal, I find that too to be facile; black and
white, either / or, in an assumed, unevidenced context.
This tiny device does not do cut and paste well, but look
up "Islamic hell", google images. You will find the "prophet"
mohammed viewing women hanging by their hair in eternal
fire, for the sin of exposing their hair in public.
My hair is mid back length, and I generally have it in
a ponytail. Flaunting, by some standards, the will
of "allah" and condemning myself to a bad future.
How does Pascal's idea work for in this situation?
sooda
Veteran Member
Weren't the earliest Christians diverse in their beliefs?
sooda
Veteran Member
Muslim women wear ponytails...
shmogie
Well-Known Member
My work was in law enforcement, years as a criminal investigator, ultimately Director of Public Safety.
You are citing irrelevant gnats re allah and your hair. Pascal was talking about the biggest camel there is.
The choice we are all free to make is binary, black and white, either or.
No choice, is a choice, every human chooses.
Pascal was addressing life and death, the only choices there are. He was not discussing minutiae like hair length, from some false prophet.
I suggest that using the techniques of a criminal investigator, one can verify evidence of and for Christ.
The Gospels are witness statements, and can be critically examined as such.
The other books of the NT give valuable evidence re the relationship of the young Church to those witness statements, and how they reflect back on to the witness statements.
Your view of cynicism and mine are different. To me a cynic views anything as not what it appears to be, with either an observed or unobserved negative that is given more value than warranted.
Say my wife is a cynic, and I realize my dream of owning a Ferrari, I point out the awesome quality of everything about the car, I tell her of the performance it has.
We get in to take it home from the dealer, and she looks around and says, ¨ I know you love this car, but I will never be able to, it only has two cup holders, in the wrong places.¨
sooda
Veteran Member
No. The gospels aren't witness statements .
shmogie
Well-Known Member
Really ? Obviously, since you are an alleged Christian who believes nothing of Christianity, you adhere to the idea that they were written by later others .
Yet, for one who spent a career analyzing witness statements, they contain most of the tells that one finds in statements of true witnesses.
So then, PROVE they were written after the Apostolic period by others.
I note you value highly the opinions, I said opinions, of secular writers. You seem hypnotized by their degrees and scholarly language.
You can dress a pig up in a gown with eye makeup and lipstick, topped by a tiara, but it is still a pig.
An opinion is still an opinion., regardless of who the opinionator is.
sooda
Veteran Member
The gospels were written 25 to 50 years after the crucifixion.
Can you believe in the message of the Christ without the miracles? Do you need walking on water and raising people from the dead or casting out "demons" to get the message?
shmogie
Well-Known Member
Yes, the Gospels were written some years after the events, but certainly within the lifetimes of the writers.
You don´t understand the significance of the miracles, they are critical.
Christ Himself said that they were the sign from God, that He had the authority He said he had.
¨I am the Son of God, and to prove it I can do this" ( paraphrase )
Without them, He was just another wandering Rabbi with some good ideas, a false Messiah, why bother with him?
As far as I know, Mohammed could no miracles. He who has eyes let him see.
Audie
Veteran Member
I was hoping for a bit more thoughtful reply.
As for your dismissive "irrelevant / gnats" comment, if
that is conversation with you we can quit now while
we have some mutual respect left.
shmogie
Well-Known Member
You don´t know the story of screening out the gnats, but swallowing the camels ? It simply means wrong priorities. It wasn´t dismissive, it was illustrative.
You and I had a long conversation about frustration and anger. I certainly was not trying to provoke you, sorry.
Audie
Veteran Member
You did not "provoke". Suggesting i am just being
emotional is, btw, also dismissive.
As fur gnats, I know the bible
better than most christians.
What I said about islam is exactly to your pascal - point,
and not taking chances, though you ignored or chose not
to see it. To them. Allah is real and the biggest deal
of all. So they choose, you choose something else,
I choose to note the spectrum of beliefs.
If you think in black and white then you do.
Binary thinking and religious fundamentalism
go together.
Analytical and cynical are as I said, nowhere relatted,
if they seem so to you, your usage of one or both words
is off. I thought that of some relevance to your saying
you used to think like me.
It could be frustrating if I try to say things to which
you either do not respond at all, or handwave
via (inapt) bible phrase, / otherwise dismiss.
Lets quit for now if so, for now. I am feeling
a tad snipoy / jetlagged, so a bit less toleran
than at some other times-
and, I actually want to be on good terms.
Since the earliest Christians would have gotten their beliefs from Jesus they would Not be diverse.
However, Not all of the first or earliest Christians remained in following Jesus, Judas for example.
Any diverse Christians would have proven themselves to be the fake 'weed/tares' Christians - Matthew 13:24-30
Thus, Jesus was warning that the genuine ' wheat ' Christians would be over sown with the weed-like imitation Christians until the Harvest Time or the soon coming ' time of separation ' on Earth as per Matthew 25:31-33,37,40.
So, apostasy was making inroads in the 1st century, but the apostles acted as a restraint in holding back such diverse Christians at that time frame.
After the 1st century the weed/tares became the 'many' while the wheat are few in comparison.
This is why even in our day or time frame the 'many ' are the fake weed/tares of Matthew 7:21-23.
Since I find John and Matthew are witnesses then why say their accounts aren't witness statements ___________